Okay, one thing we need to have a clear picture is that:
DL and CI are really not working together bar a few codeshares and Skyteam is just DL's partner and everyone else. DL doesn't need CI's feed beyond TPE and CI doesn't need DL's feed beyond LAX/SFO/ONT/JFK.
UA and BR doesn't even codeshare. You might be able to purchase a ticket with a connection with both carriers, but they don't work together beyond alliance benefits. Same situation for BR/UA as well, they don't need each other's feed beyond the destination they serve.
The only partnership that go beyond as of now may be AS and JX cause they codeshare, but then AS works with everyone even if they don't codeshare.
Originally Posted by
bzcat
We are really talking about three different markets with TPE-US and everyone plays to their strength and try to dominate their own niche.
DL and UA are competing on US originating fares with TPE as end points. If you are in a non-gateway location in the US, you can connect at SFO or SEA without much backtracking. Doesn't make a big difference on timing but FF program may make a difference. DL and UA don't need onward feed at TPE because they are absolutely not interested in chasing those fares.
I think UA has the upper hand cause SFO as a gateway just trumps SEA (in every department). UA can capture the cheapest O/D market to fill the plane without a problem. There just isn't enough O/D there in Seattle for DL.
Originally Posted by
bzcat
And finally, US-Southeast Asia market is very fragmented. US airlines don't factor in very much between US and Southeast Asia - if you try to buy a ticket with US3, you end up on their JV partners via NRT or ICN instead of TPE. For Taiwanese carriers, since TPE is only one of many options to connect and they are locked out of US3 JV feed, it means they have to invest in marketing and distribution to generate corporate and VFR sales. BR has been far more active and successful than CI in marketing itself as a connection to Southeast Asia and has carved out a very significant distribution channel presence in both ends (US originating and Southeast Asia originating). This is basically the explanation for why BR has higher load factor at JFK than CI (BR has higher market share for NYC-Southeast Asia than CI).
I think BR is quite price driven in this market in comparison to CI. CI's connecting price isn't as competitive on the South East Asian market. BR rather give the seats to the connecting passengers and charge less but CI maintains the price more average for both markets (Taiwan and beyond Taiwan).
Also, I feel none of the Taiwanese airlines felt the pressure yet cause the flights to India has not been reinstated. If they are not doing well on the existing markets, they would need the Indians. These days we only see the VPs and not I on the Taiwanese carriers.
Originally Posted by
bzcat
As to why BR is more successful than CI in the US-Southeast Asia segment, I think it has to do with their respective historical market position in TPE O&D. CI used to dominate the O&D so BR had to get creative. The O&D market is more balanced now but BR still maintain its structural advantage in connecting traffic because of those early marketing and sales channel investments.
I feel this also has to do with generations.
Those who first moved to USA, mostly in the bay area north of SFO and flushings in JFK, have passed away (or unable to take flights due to health concerns) the past 10 years. Most of their kids, like some of my friends parents, never really thought CI was that great to begin with when CI operated mostly just outdated 744s on these routes till 2010s or so. BR on the other hand, had newer planes coming in almost 10 years earlier than CI and a more younger feel. FA service wise BR might not be as experienced or good than CI, but is acceptable when you compare to the services you get from the US legacies. Also, BR was one of the few airlines who invented the concept of premium economy and had outstanding performance by putting them at the nose (that captured the younger market who are now 40+). Those were good days for BR and people who fly them. On top of that, once you are with an airline or alliance, it's really difficult to drop to another one unless something really bad happened.
While some of the generations stayed at JFK, most moved sporadically to the north or the south (so if they need to travel back to Taiwan, they don't necessary want to travel to JFK to take the non-stop).
LAX and SJC are more of the second generations that moved in, this is more equal in terms of market share that BR and CI shares. Those who live around SJC goes to SFO regardless cause they don't have a better choice, but those who live in LAX now got ONT as an option as many are no longer in downtown LA (or even San Gabriel Valley for the most part).
Now, with JX coming in, it's just like the new BR with government support back in the days. The only differences is that there is really not much of the pie left to share with JX. Unless CI gets into accidents again, it's hard for the government to take away rights from CI just so JX can get something (or to have a situation in the 1990s to favor BR for competition reasons cause it's already 2 airlines in existence). Also, there's not much of new bilateral to negotiate as most places are already set (and you can't just take away incumbents).
Though, BR's overall services has been a let down since COVID while CI's product has improved. Once CI gets rid of the 333/738s next 2 years, BR actually becomes the oldest airline in terms of plane operations. The game might change a bit as we go.